(영문) 서울고등법원 2015.03.19 2014노3644 | 리걸엔진

beta

본 영문본은 리걸엔진의 AI 번역 엔진으로 번역되었습니다. 수정이 필요한 부분이 있는 경우 피드백 부탁드립니다.

Text

Reasons

텍스트 조절

글꼴

크기(pt)

굵기

줄 간격

자간(%)

(영문) 서울고등법원 2015.03.19 2014노3644

살인등

Text

The defendant's appeal is dismissed.

Reasons

1. The sentence of the lower court to the accused (12 years of imprisonment) against the summary of the grounds for appeal is too unreasonable;

2. The judgment of the defendant recognized all of the crimes of this case as well, the fact that the defendant does not seem to have planned murdered the victim, that her husband submitted an application to the defendant at the time of the victim's death, that her husband deposited KRW 10 million with the victim's children as the deposited person, and that the defendant was the first offender, etc. are conditions for sentencing favorable to the defendant.

However, in light of various circumstances, such as the victim's relation to the victim's family members, the victim took away the victim's life, which is a valuable value that cannot be compared to what is, and the victim's bereaved family members suffered in depth where they could not recover through their life, and the result of the crime was very significant. The defendant murdered the victim's neck on the ground that he did not take the victim's speech to the victim's family members, the victim's strokes the victim's stroke, the victim's strokes the victim's stroke, the victim's strokes the victim's stroke, and the victim's strokes the victim's stroke, and the victim's strokes the victim's strokes the victim's stroke, and the victim's s children did not use the defendant, and there is no circumstance to view that the victim'

In addition, considering the Defendant’s age, character and conduct, environment, motive, means and consequence of the crime, circumstances after the crime, and the scope of the recommended sentence set by the Supreme Court’s Sentencing Committee (excluding the recommended sentence, excluding imprisonment from 10 years to 16 years, and the violation of the Electronic Financial Transactions Act in which no sentencing guidelines have been set) as a whole, the lower court’s sentence cannot be deemed to be too unreasonable. Thus, the Defendant’s assertion

3. Conclusion, the defendant.

참조조문

-전자금융거래법

유사 판례

-서울고등법원 2015.03.20 2014노4024

-서울고등법원 2015.08.27 2015노1294

-대전고등법원 2016.12.02 2016노284

-부산고등법원 2014.04.23 2013노634

-서울고등법원 2015.12.11 2015노2849